Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
President Trump President Trump

06-28-2017 , 04:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Not being widely reported, but that's not a big surprise.

Dunno if this is true, but the story sure makes Trump out to be a big ****ing idiot so that part is credible.

edit: Well, Trump is an idiot either way, but this dialog sounds fake as hell. If it's fake, they need better writers.

https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/...n-problem.html
The situation seems very likely. Assad assuredly didn't use chemical weapons, just from a logical standpoint.

Trump used it as political theater. He knew what he was doing. It's like when he leaked his tax returns.

He's doing all this on purpose. How can you not see this?
06-28-2017 , 07:08 AM
tldr warning and yes I guess my own "word salad" creation.

Equality of opportunity debate is a great example of people "talking" past each other. The "Great Gatsby" graphic goofy posted a link to is what exactly? In my view it is an attempt to claim that many blacks that live in poverty are unfairly trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty and thus are pretty much permanent members of the underclass. Then in order to substantiate that position we get a lot of "word salad" posting that claim that this is actually happening. Pretty sure TwoPlusTwo has few people that are part of the underclass and poker being what it is, many people on this forum see themselves as having plenty of economic opportunity and weigh in that indeed they do. So ...

-- To me it is very clear that breaking the cycle of poverty that exists in much of the black community is extremely difficult.

-- That there is tremendous economic opportunity for many people in the USA.

-- It is much tougher for poor people to significantly improve their lot.

So how do we make it easier to do so, make the "playing field" level?

The ideas posted seem to be:

1. Eliminate systemic racism.
2. "Buck up" poor people's income via minimum wage, EIC, whatever works best.
3. Raise taxes and make the tax system more progressive.
4. Promote economic growth more aggressively, a rising tide lifts all boats.
5. Encourage/demand that the underclass adopt cultural values that are inline with improving their economic lot in life. It has been pointed out/implied in many posts that generally speaking that the Asian and the Jewish communities demonstrate cultural values that are highly valuable/worth embracing.
6. Provide better access to healthcare.
7. Provide a much higher quality of education for those in the underclass.
8. White privilege is a large impediment to eliminating a permanent underclass.

Discuss.
06-28-2017 , 07:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Not being widely reported, but that's not a big surprise.

Dunno if this is true, but the story sure makes Trump out to be a big ****ing idiot so that part is credible.

edit: Well, Trump is an idiot either way, but this dialog sounds fake as hell. If it's fake, they need better writers.

https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/...n-problem.html
The Syrain chemical attacks are strange because the fringe right AND the fringe left are denying they happened.

But the fringe right and fringe left also deny that Russia was involved in hacking the DNC and others.

I really don't understand the motivations here.
06-28-2017 , 07:48 AM
There's.. quite a lot of topics in that post. I will let others try to tackle it, but I really want to talk about #5.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
5. Encourage/demand that the underclass adopt cultural values that are inline with improving their economic lot in life.
This has always bothered me because I can't come to a satisfactory answer, especially so without thinking that my line of thought will most likely be considered racist, or at the very least borderline racist. (I'm sure not many of you are surprised)

Of all the groups in the United States, African Americans (and Native Americans, but no one ever talks about them) are unique due to their circumstances - they were forced to come here instead of choosing to. Every group of people, whether they are Italians, Japanese, Irish, Nigerian, or Moroccan all seem to integrate and blend into American society pretty well over a generation or two of coming here. It seems to me they want to be viewed as "American" as everyone else while still holding on to their ethnic heritage - on their own terms.

And that's where I believe we have a fundamental issue. Due to the history of the way African Americans have been treated, they needed to react differently than other groups. Integration was not an option for them due to the racism of Whites. They were never allowed to, integration wasn't an option for their group specifically.

I find it very troubling that in the black community in particular you will constantly hear "Uncle Tom" or accusations of "trying to act White" when certain behaviors or positions are held by their fellow blacks. Yet, we do not see this in groups like the Japanese or the Italians or Koreans, at least, not on the same level. I've had other Koreans joke with me I'm not a "real" Korean because I can't speak the language well or I don't know Korean culture well, but it was very much in a jovial manner. It's not a joke in the black community. It's a serious insult and a way of shaming the person, and from what I understand, is considered the most vile insult one black person can make to another.

I couldn't imagine an Italian, Japanese, or Moroccan person doing well in school or speaking in a certain manner and someone of their own ethnicity denouncing them for "acting White" or being a "sellout" to their own race. So why are we so silent when we hear this in the black community? Part of it is fear, especially so as an outsider. I wouldn't dream of interfering in what is essentially a personal issue. Support could be viewed as subversion in that instance, I've learned that lesson the hard way.

Of all the things that trouble me about race, this one in particular troubles me the most. I think it troubles me the most because I can't really tell someone to ignore their own people - no one can, they have to make that decision for themselves.

I dunno. I'm tired, it's been a long day. Hopefully I won't be banned when I wake up. Hopefully there will be some interesting perspectives when I come back to the thread instead of me being called a racist ignorant dickhead.

Last edited by wil318466; 06-28-2017 at 08:16 AM.
06-28-2017 , 08:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
The situation seems very likely. Assad assuredly didn't use chemical weapons, just from a logical standpoint.

Trump used it as political theater. He knew what he was doing. It's like when he leaked his tax returns.

He's doing all this on purpose. How can you not see this?
I see where you are coming from but you are missing one key point, while Assad was "winning," he was no where close to having the ability to taking the entire country back as he desires. "Winning" just meant being confident he would hold onto Damascus and his strongholds and make incremental gains elsewhere. If he can send the message that we will gas you and your children, and no one will give a ****, then that is devastating from a psychological standpoint and may make total victory possible.

Entirety possible that Assad misread the situation. If you remember, that week Trump and his team was saying it was just reality that Assad was staying in power and too late to do anything about it now. In addition, you have Trump showing an indifference, if not, affinity for brutal dictators and everyone saying he is tied to Putin, who is Assad's #1 fan. He had downplayed Sadaam gassing his own people, a very, very similar situation. There is logic to Assad thinking he can get away with it, and doesn't take much logic for a butcher like Assad to take the chance to terrorize people.
06-28-2017 , 09:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
The situation seems very likely. Assad assuredly didn't use chemical weapons, just from a logical standpoint.
"Assuredly"?

Assad figured he could get away with it because Russia would convince Trump--who loves conspiracy theories--that it was all a huge conspiracy. To Trump's credit, he didn't fall for it.

Others, however...
06-28-2017 , 09:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
Wait. I thought you lived in Missouri?
No, kansas. why did you think that?
06-28-2017 , 10:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
The Syrain chemical attacks are strange because the fringe right AND the fringe left are denying they happened.

But the fringe right and fringe left also deny that Russia was involved in hacking the DNC and others.

I really don't understand the motivations here.
The non-fringe thinks that government only lies when it's caught and there's a big story in the Washington Post. They think My Lai was a unique event because it's the one massacre that got widely reported by Seymour Hersh.

The fringe, even sober honest awesome reporters like I.F. Stone said:

Quote:
All governments are run by liars and nothing they say should be believed.
That said, as I made clear before, I'm skeptical of the Syria attack really either way. The transcript sounds phony and maybe the 80yo Hersh is too easy to fool. It would take a lot to be confident in anything though about this or any other story about any events in a war where it's reasonably possible for people to be lying/faking.

Last edited by microbet; 06-28-2017 at 10:44 AM.
06-28-2017 , 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
Ok, I'm totally fine with that. In fact, personally, I mostly support healthcare. You see me talking about single-payer, right? The difference is I can respect someone's opinion who doesn't. I don't think I should be forcing my view on anyone on large entitlements like this.

Philosophically I can see why people don't like it. Even social security should be modified, as it seems it's now benefitting the rich. But whatever. I'm the end I'll be fine either way.
You can respect their opinion and still make them pay. I suspect there are many people in America who dislike income taxes and yet I don't see many using that as an argument for getting rid of them.

Also it seems like the American people want government in their healthcare:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...-by-democrats/


Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
I work in the energy industry. I guess me and my wife are pretty equal, but she's worth more money, we currently refuse to go for it. I guess I make 140 or so. I'll probably make 180 this year. She's worth 200 and should be a director right now but we are having another baby and I don't want her to take the position. I told her I'd work harder so she could take it easy for now. It's bad enough I work shift, so I can't be around all the time. I don't want her to have less time with the kids right now.

It doesn't really matter at this point. It's fine but the stress never ends, which I thought should happen but it actually got worse. It's bizarre.

I don't think I can keep up this pace forever.
Cool. Thanks for response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
This entire view is nonsensical. Who decides what is more deserving of help? If you're a minority? If you're ugly? If you're short? The only reasonable thing to do is judge people as individuals. This idea that you should be feeling sorry for people is idiotic. I was born into a low income minority family. Do you feel bad for me? I'll pm you my PayPal you can send me money.
Are you still talking about healthcare? You're in luck because single payer doesn't decide who is more deserving of help, it gives equal healthcare to everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
Being born in poverty sucks but don't tell me it's impossible to climb out of. Access to quality education is an obstacle but liberals are in charge of everything when it comes to education so who is to blame?
Wait what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
None of us are born equal. None. Everyone has different abilities and situations. That doesn't matter, what matters is what happens when you can improve your situation.

What, exactly, do you have an issue with in terms of my position?
Mostly that it's self contradictory.
06-28-2017 , 10:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
No, kansas. why did you think that?
I'd guess because you talked about KC and he figured MO, not KC KS.
06-28-2017 , 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
The "Great Gatsby" graphic goofy posted a link to is what exactly? In my view it is an attempt to claim that many blacks that live in poverty are unfairly trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty and thus are pretty much permanent members of the underclass.
Damn liberals, always making everything about race :P

Seriously though, I disagree strongly. "Equality of opportunity", "intergenerational mobility", the discussion about minimum wages, UBI, EITC, none of those are coded references to race. Obviously race is salient to discussions about wealth and income inequality in the US, but it's quite possible to be concerned with relative inequality between poor and wealthy white people as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Then in order to substantiate that position we get a lot of "word salad" posting that claim that this is actually happening.
If you think specific claims are "word salad", you should try arguing against them specifically, imo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
-- To me it is very clear that breaking the cycle of poverty that exists in much of the black community is extremely difficult.

-- That there is tremendous economic opportunity for many people in the USA.

-- It is much tougher for poor people to significantly improve their lot.
I agree, and there are racial differences in intergenerational mobility, but the mobility numbers suggest that "breaking the cycle of poverty" is a problem in many white communities as well. It's not a strictly racial issue. In this conversation, goofy and I were really only trying to make the final point from your list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
So how do we make it easier to do so, make the "playing field" level?

The ideas posted seem to be:

1. Eliminate systemic racism.
This isn't really an "idea", imo. It's too vague. What does it mean specifically to eliminate systemic racism? The last time you raised this question, I gave an answer which I don't think you ever reacted to. So I'll post it again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
I think Trump should fire Jeff Sessions and appoint an AG who will continue the Obama administration DOJ's emphasis on criminal justice reform through the Office of Civil Rights. The AG should also reverse Sessions' enthusiasm for maximum sentencing and the prosecution of the drug war. We should pursue a reduction in incarceration levels.

I think you should support economic policies and programs meant to reduce economic stratification and poverty. That should certainly begin with opposition to cutting taxes on the very wealthy and paying for it by removing funding for universal healthcare (i.e you should oppose AHCA).

Social programs for universal healthcare and education (and perhaps others) are an important part of this, but more basically I think our taxation and spending schemes should be more progressive and redistributive, with the goal of offsetting the fact that the benefits of globalization and technology over the last several decades have overwhelmingly gone to the very wealthy, while everyone else falls behind. I think we should spend less money on the military in order to support these goals.

There's probably other more specific actions that I would support, but those are the two biggest components of the kind of policy plan I support. Criminal justice reform is more explicitly focused on racial discrimination, but I imagine that politically tenable and desirable solutions to economic stratification should be more universal, and should benefit the poor white people in the rural areas I've lived my whole life as well as poor black people. With the caveat that it's important to make sure that these programs don't become racially discriminatory in implementation, a problem that we've seen more than once (the GI bill and medicaid expansion, to mention two examples).
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
Addendum: I like Obama's approach from this interview with Ta-Nehesi Coates:

Quote:
Coates: I thought we’d talk about policy today. I wanted to start by getting a sense of your mind-set coming into the job, and as I’ve understood you—and you can reject this—your perspective is that a mixture of universalist policies, in combination with an increased level of personal responsibility and communal responsibility among African Americans, when we talk about these gaps that we see between black and white America, that that really is the way forward. Is that a correct summation?

Obama: I think it’s a three-legged stool and you left out one, which is vigorous enforcement of antidiscrimination laws. So the way we thought about it when we came in is that—and obviously we came in during crisis, so how we might have structured our policy sequencing if, when we came in, the economy was okay, and we weren’t potentially going into a great recession, and folks weren’t all losing their homes, might have been different. But as a general matter, my view would be that if you want to get at African American poverty, the income gap, wealth gap, achievement gap, that the most important thing is to make sure that the society as a whole does right by people who are poor, are working class, are aspiring to a better life for their kids. Higher minimum wages, full-employment programs, early-childhood education: Those kinds of programs are, by design, universal, but by definition, because they are helping folks who are in the worst economic situations, are most likely to disproportionately impact and benefit African Americans. They also have the benefit of being sellable to a majority of the body politic.

Step No. 2, and this is where I think policies do need to be somewhat race-specific, is making sure that institutions are not discriminatory. So you’ve got something like the FHA [Federal Housing Administration], which was on its face a universal program that involved a huge mechanism for wealth accumulation and people entering into the middle class. But if, in its application, black folks were excluded from it, then you have to override that by going after those discriminatory practices...
As it turns out, I think most of what I suggested, as well as Obama's comments, are somewhat similar to your list:

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
2. "Buck up" poor people's income via minimum wage, EIC, whatever works best.
3. Raise taxes and make the tax system more progressive.
4. Promote economic growth more aggressively, a rising tide lifts all boats.
5. Encourage/demand that the underclass adopt cultural values that are inline with improving their economic lot in life. It has been pointed out/implied in many posts that generally speaking that the Asian and the Jewish communities demonstrate cultural values that are highly valuable/worth embracing.
6. Provide better access to healthcare.
7. Provide a much higher quality of education for those in the underclass.
8. White privilege is a large impediment to eliminating a permanent underclass.
But it's an important point that concern about economic inequality is not just concern about race.
06-28-2017 , 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
"Assuredly"?

Assad figured he could get away with it because Russia would convince Trump--who loves conspiracy theories--that it was all a huge conspiracy. To Trump's credit, he didn't fall for it.

Others, however...
That doesn't make sense. The believable explanation is that Assad or some commander below him is a nut or an idiot or it was a mistake. There are plenty of nuts, idiots and lots of mistakes.

The problem is there's almost no conceivable
military upside for Assad.
06-28-2017 , 11:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
The non-fringe thinks that government only lies when it's caught and there's a big story in the Washington Post. They think My Lai was a unique event because it's the one massacre that got widely reported by Seymour Hersh.
This isn't true at all.

Quote:
That said, as I made clear before, I'm skeptical of the Syria attack really either way. The transcript sounds phony and maybe the 80yo Hersh is too easy to fool. It would take a lot to be confident in anything though about this or any other story about any events in a war where it's reasonably possible for people to be lying/faking.
I don't mind this position if there's little or no independent evidence, but there is a lot of evidence that sarin was used--including analysis from British scientists with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and a statement form Doctors Without Borders, noting:
Quote:
Eight patients showed symptoms – including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation – which are consistent with exposure to a neurotoxic agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds.
Also, Russia publicly said that they bombed a warehouse/chemical weapons factory, but Hersh's story says they told the US they bombed a two-story building that was a meeting place with chemicals stored in the basement. The Syrians themselves claimed that the operation was a "false flag" by the rebels.

Given the evidence from a variety of sources and the inconsistent claims of Russia and Syria I'm very confident this was a chemical weapons attack carried out by Syria.
06-28-2017 , 11:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
That doesn't make sense. The believable explanation is that Assad or some commander below him is a nut or an idiot or it was a mistake. There are plenty of nuts, idiots and lots of mistakes.

The problem is there's almost no conceivable
military upside for Assad.
I can't rule out that possibility, but even if true it doesn't excuse the Assad regime in any way. To say there's no possible upside to the use of chemical weapons is absurd. I don't think Assad expected to get caught, much less face any repercussions.
06-28-2017 , 11:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
I can't rule out that possibility, but even if true it doesn't excuse the Assad regime in any way. To say there's no possible upside to the use of chemical weapons is absurd. I don't think Assad expected to get caught, much less face any repercussions.
The only conceivable military benefit is if he gets caught. It would be an act of terror and only valuable if it frightens people. They would have to know about it for that to happen. If the goal was killing people he'd just have dropped a barrel bomb. (Unless someone involved was a crazy idiot who made a mistake)

And he didn't face any repercussions. For whatever reason our response was clearly not intended to cause more than trivial damage.
06-28-2017 , 11:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
And I do not agree with that. I actually believe it's pretty easy to move up, while I'll admit that many people do not agree. I think most people are just stupid and squander their opportunities. Shrug. I can't live other people's lives for them. I was lucky that my parents raised me in the right mindset and to not blame external factors for failure.

Failure or success is ON YOU in America. No one is going to give you jack ****. Go out and do it, make your life better. If you don't fundamentally believe that's possible in this country then we have a philosophical issue. I believe it's possible, almost easy. You don't.

This is America and no one cares what God you pray to or what color your skin is. I, for one, am grateful for that or I wouldn't be here.
wil, you are disputing data with feels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
So, like, what, did any of you dudes think I was joking, exaggerating for dramatic and poetic effect, when I said wil is the type of person responsible for everything that is wrong with everything?
No, not really, but I think the reason your post is true is precisely because wil is not uniquely bad. In fact I would argue the only thing unusual about wil is his willingness to share so many of his thoughts on this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
I don't see what is so funny. Samson hangs on every word I say. It's creepy.

5ives obsession with me is downright criminal.
You don't even know what he's saying lol.

----

@Bryce,
I have lots to say about these posts so forgive me if it becomes disorganized. Also while I think I disagree with much of these posts, I do not think they are bad posts. Our disagreements are mostly philosophical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
I wonder why wil is like the only conservative who posts here? I have some theories on that.
I'd be interested to hear your theories but I have a couple of thoughts:

1) It doesn't matter very much why for purposes of this discussion. All that matters is that it is true. If there is only one poster posting from a particular viewpoint it is going to necessarily appear that everyone else is ganging up on them.

2) Regarding my theories as to why, I think there are a number of reasons
- Some that post here will get tired of being clowned on and leave.
- There just aren't that many conservatives on 2+2 generally.
- Many of the conservatives that are here either have no interest in posting in a substantive manner or are simply not intelligent to do so. See mongidid and BroadwaySushy. They are clearly conservatives but they are not offering anything in the way of content discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
You need to know that you are very wrong about the harassment. I have a lot of experience and knowledge about this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
Tilted , many people are much more sensitive than you (not a good or bad thing) so you need to be careful how you treat people especially those being trolled online. i was very very upset about my posts on here and my treatment by many posters and spent a long time crying about it. Totally serious. Ive become a tougher person though and wil is currently a tougher person than I was. But good people should be careful about how they treat others online.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
and that was in my 20's. If i had been treated that way when i was 13 I really might have shot myself.
I have mixed feelings about this. It sucks that you went through that.

That being said, I don't think I agree that it is very much my responsibility to make sure people don't get sad on the internet. It seems to me that if Poster X posts logically challenged political posts on the internet and then I quote that post and call Poster X a moron and Poster X is sad, that is very much a Poster X problem and not a me problem. Also, I am very unconvinced that if Poster X subsequently goes out and commits suicide that I bear much responsibility for that at all.

I am also very unconvinced that any posting towards wil in this subforum (at least recently) rises to the level of harassment. We are engaging him in topics that he chooses to post in, in a tone that mostly mirrors his own tone, on an internet forum dedicated to that kind of posting. Noone is, say, looking up his Facebook and calling him a moron there.
06-28-2017 , 11:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
The only conceivable military benefit is if he gets caught. It would be an act of terror and only valuable if it frightens people. They would have to know about it for that to happen. If the goal was killing people he'd just have dropped a barrel bomb. (Unless someone involved was a crazy idiot who made a mistake)

And he didn't face any repercussions. For whatever reason our response was clearly not intended to cause more than trivial damage.
Obviously the people who see their family members drop dead will know. And the first responders will know. And the White Helmets will know. That's who he wants to get the message.
06-28-2017 , 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
Obviously the people who see their family members drop dead will know. And the first responders will know. And the White Helmets will know. That's who he wants to get the message.
They were all going to know and yet he wasn't going to "get caught" as you said. And that's competent reasonable strategy on Assad's part? He was reasonably thinking that he was expert enough to thread the needle between the White Helmets knowing about it, but not any western governments or media?

Apologies for the sarcasm. Idiot, accident, or lies imo.
06-28-2017 , 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
No, kansas. why did you think that?
I thought you lived in Kansas City.
06-28-2017 , 12:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
Damn liberals, always making everything about race :P

Seriously though, I disagree strongly. "Equality of opportunity", "intergenerational mobility", the discussion about minimum wages, UBI, EITC, none of those are coded references to race. Obviously race is salient to discussions about wealth and income inequality in the US, but it's quite possible to be concerned with relative inequality between poor and wealthy white people as well.



If you think specific claims are "word salad", you should try arguing against them specifically, imo.



I agree, and there are racial differences in intergenerational mobility, but the mobility numbers suggest that "breaking the cycle of poverty" is a problem in many white communities as well. It's not a strictly racial issue. In this conversation, goofy and I were really only trying to make the final point from your list.



This isn't really an "idea", imo. It's too vague. What does it mean specifically to eliminate systemic racism? The last time you raised this question, I gave an answer which I don't think you ever reacted to. So I'll post it again.
Ok I guess your point is be committed to a plan to identify how systemic racism manifests itself and how to eliminate those ways it does. The goal is to ... eliminate systemic racism. Ldo.



Quote:
As it turns out, I think most of what I suggested, as well as Obama's comments, are somewhat similar to your list:k



But it's an important point that concern about economic inequality is not just concern about race.
Nobody stated was just about race but proportionally speaking who has the least amount of economic mobility/most to gain by reform. Is there any doubt that blacks have are disproportionately represented among the poor?
06-28-2017 , 12:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
Nah, they've already got enough good looking women over there.
lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by corvette24
Complete and utter bull****. I never said one harsh word to you before you brazenly said that all liberals, me included, should be eviscerated from the planet. I have been a participant in numerous threads in the Politics sections for a great while now, and I have never had a cross word with anyone.

Now, there are people that don't think I represent the left because I am sticking up for myself against a war of words started by you. That's too bad really. I have long been an active champion for progressive policies, getting involved in local government while calling/writing members of congress and phone banking during elections.

I am completely tired of it and I am completely tired of you. You were rude as **** to me and to half the country with your hateful rhetoric. You win again. You can go **** yourself.
corvette24, a couple things in reference to my post where I said you "don't represent the left".

1) I think it's mostly a mistake in general to say someone "represents" the left or right unless that person does so literally (i.e. they are an elected official).

2) You may have plenty of good posting elsewhere (I'm not really familiar with your posting) and you may do plenty of good in real life.

3) I think your posts just attacking wil are bad posts. The fact that wil's posts are also bad posts does not change this, in my opinion.

---

Before responding to adios' post I want to say that I agree pretty much 100% with well named's response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
The "Great Gatsby" graphic goofy posted a link to is what exactly? In my view it is an attempt to claim that many blacks that live in poverty are unfairly trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty and thus are pretty much permanent members of the underclass.
As well named said, it's not really about race at all. It's true that in the US African Americans are disproportionately represented among the poor and that for that reason will they will be disproportionately helped by policies that help the poor. But that is tangential to the arguments being made here; there are plenty of poor Americans of every race.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
-- To me it is very clear that breaking the cycle of poverty that exists in much of the black community is extremely difficult.

-- That there is tremendous economic opportunity for many people in the USA.

-- It is much tougher for poor people to significantly improve their lot.

So how do we make it easier to do so, make the "playing field" level?
I agree with this, except that I would point out again that the qualifier "black" there is unnecessary. The difficulties in breaking the cycle of poverty very much exist in poor communities in general.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
The ideas posted seem to be:

1. Eliminate systemic racism.
2. "Buck up" poor people's income via minimum wage, EIC, whatever works best.
3. Raise taxes and make the tax system more progressive.
4. Promote economic growth more aggressively, a rising tide lifts all boats.
5. Encourage/demand that the underclass adopt cultural values that are inline with improving their economic lot in life. It has been pointed out/implied in many posts that generally speaking that the Asian and the Jewish communities demonstrate cultural values that are highly valuable/worth embracing.
6. Provide better access to healthcare.
7. Provide a much higher quality of education for those in the underclass.
8. White privilege is a large impediment to eliminating a permanent underclass.

Discuss.
#1 is not a thing we can just do. "Systemic racism" is more an effect that a cause. The tinkering needs to be done at a much more specific level.

#2, #3, #4, #6, and #7 are all things we should do IMO, while understanding that there will sometimes need to be compromise between #s 2/3 and #4.

#5 I think is problematic, especially when used with the word "demand". I think if you fix the other issues you will find that the cultural issues you think are there will mostly disappear on their own.

#8 is similar to #1. While I do think there is a degree of explicit discrimination against minorities in America I do not think that degree is large enough to prevent significant progress if we implement the right policies. I think with enough progress, you will find that the concept of "white privilege" will tend to shrink on it's own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
There's.. quite a lot of topics in that post. I will let others try to tackle it, but I really want to talk about #5.



This has always bothered me because I can't come to a satisfactory answer, especially so without thinking that my line of thought will most likely be considered racist, or at the very least borderline racist. (I'm sure not many of you are surprised)

Of all the groups in the United States, African Americans (and Native Americans, but no one ever talks about them) are unique due to their circumstances - they were forced to come here instead of choosing to. Every group of people, whether they are Italians, Japanese, Irish, Nigerian, or Moroccan all seem to integrate and blend into American society pretty well over a generation or two of coming here. It seems to me they want to be viewed as "American" as everyone else while still holding on to their ethnic heritage - on their own terms.

And that's where I believe we have a fundamental issue. Due to the history of the way African Americans have been treated, they needed to react differently than other groups. Integration was not an option for them due to the racism of Whites. They were never allowed to, integration wasn't an option for their group specifically.

I find it very troubling that in the black community in particular you will constantly hear "Uncle Tom" or accusations of "trying to act White" when certain behaviors or positions are held by their fellow blacks. Yet, we do not see this in groups like the Japanese or the Italians or Koreans, at least, not on the same level. I've had other Koreans joke with me I'm not a "real" Korean because I can't speak the language well or I don't know Korean culture well, but it was very much in a jovial manner. It's not a joke in the black community. It's a serious insult and a way of shaming the person, and from what I understand, is considered the most vile insult one black person can make to another.

I couldn't imagine an Italian, Japanese, or Moroccan person doing well in school or speaking in a certain manner and someone of their own ethnicity denouncing them for "acting White" or being a "sellout" to their own race. So why are we so silent when we hear this in the black community? Part of it is fear, especially so as an outsider. I wouldn't dream of interfering in what is essentially a personal issue. Support could be viewed as subversion in that instance, I've learned that lesson the hard way.

Of all the things that trouble me about race, this one in particular troubles me the most. I think it troubles me the most because I can't really tell someone to ignore their own people - no one can, they have to make that decision for themselves.

I dunno. I'm tired, it's been a long day. Hopefully I won't be banned when I wake up. Hopefully there will be some interesting perspectives when I come back to the thread instead of me being called a racist ignorant dickhead.
Discrimination => poverty => "cultural issues" => poverty => "cultural issues" => etc.

The problems you describe may be real (although I suspect they are exaggerated and overly racialized; I don't think poor white people exactly have great respect for education) but you've got a lot more policy leverage in changing poverty than you do in changing "culture".

You reduce the poverty and I greatly expect you will see the "culture problems" reduced as well.

Last edited by TiltedDonkey; 06-28-2017 at 12:34 PM.
06-28-2017 , 12:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Ok I guess your point is be committed to a plan to identify how systemic racism manifests itself and how to eliminate those ways it does. The goal is to ... eliminate systemic racism. Ldo.
The goal was to increase inter-generation mobility and reduce the levels of poverty, not anything about systemic racism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Nobody stated was just about race but proportionally speaking who has the least amount of economic mobility/most to gain by reform. Is there any doubt that blacks have are disproportionately represented among the poor?
Sure, but why does this need to be relevant to a discussion about policy that is aimed at reducing poverty? The arguments being put forth here about poverty would be mostly the same even if the races were proportionally represented among the impoverished.
06-28-2017 , 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
They were all going to know and yet he wasn't going to "get caught" as you said. And that's competent reasonable strategy on Assad's part? He was reasonably thinking that he was expert enough to thread the needle between the White Helmets knowing about it, but not any western governments or media?

Apologies for the sarcasm. Idiot, accident, or lies imo.
The bet was that the West would "unfortunately" throw their hands up and do nothing as intervening would "only make the situation worse." You know, the same reasoning given for doing jack**** when they murdered UN workers by intentionally bombing UN trucks that were trying to deliver food and aid as Assad starved Allepo.

Combined with Russia lying, obfuscating and creating doubt that maybe this was a false flag, which is one reason cited by Obama for balking the first time Assad used chemical weapons.

Last edited by Pwn_Master; 06-28-2017 at 12:55 PM.
06-28-2017 , 12:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pwn_Master
The bet was that the West would "unfortunately" throw their hands up and do nothing as intervening would "only make the situation worse." You know, the same reasoning given for doing jack**** when they murdered UN workers by intentionally bombing UN trucks that were trying to deliver food and aid as Assad starved Allepo.

Combined with Russia lying, obfuscating and creating doubt that maybe this was a false flag, which is one reason cited by Obama for balking the first time Assad used chemical weapons.
What was the bet that it would accomplish?

Now starving the population is apples and oranges. That's how you break resistance. That's a real atrocity. It's what we're doing in Yemen. It's kind of amazing how relatively little press it gets that 17 million people are threatened with famine in Yemen. A potential atrocity comparable with the holocaust that we are participating in right now. I know that's a digression, but you triggered me when you brought up starving a population.
06-28-2017 , 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
What was the bet that it would accomplish?

Now starving the population is apples and oranges. That's how you break resistance. That's a real atrocity. It's what we're doing in Yemen. It's kind of amazing how relatively little press it gets that 17 million people are threatened with famine in Yemen. A potential atrocity comparable with the holocaust that we are participating in right now. I know that's a digression, but you triggered me when you brought up starving a population.
The bet is that you successfully send the message that we can do literally whatever we want to you and no one cares. There is zero hope for you. If you are resisting because you think there is hope that you will defeat us, you are wrong. We are more powerful than you and no one will lift a finger to help you.... ever..... no matter what.

Also, if you are allowing the jihadists to control your town because you are more fearful of them than us, you are also wrong.

The only hope for you is to flee or surrender.

      
m